What this family website misses is that every new generation is raised as a social experiment. How will new technology, ideas, ways of living, affect these new children? Living in single-parent homes? Living with people not at all related to them? Spending more time in a day care than with their parents?
Also, I absolutely LOVE how that site refuses to state whether it's talking about single-parent homes or gay-parent homes by using the overlapping terms "fatherless" and "motherless". It could be (and I think it is) trying to equate single parent families to homosexually-parented families, against all logic & certainly against the scientific spirit of any studies cited.
I see other things I have issues with, but I need sleep more than I need to type a response to a LJ post. =p
1) I never said I agreed with that site. I don't. :) I'm saying that many people do, and we need to come up with clear and solid reasons that -they- will accept in order to win.
...well, I almost did it in one. 4) actually, Clinton already redefined marriage: http://www.lectlaw.com/files/leg23.htm Funny how there was no controversy then, by comparison.
Essentially, the whole point behind my post was to say that you cannot win a debate without knowing the arsenal that your opponent has, or without even knowing what exactly they are saying. Too many people do not.
the ironic thing with clinton is that his was called "defense of marriage act" and protected it from being changed, while bush is going for "protection of marriage" or something close to it, and wants to change it.
I love you! thats the best thing anyone has said yet! about either topics yea it sucks get over it theres nothing we can do itll change eventually its not like hes there forever
Comments 8
Also, I absolutely LOVE how that site refuses to state whether it's talking about single-parent homes or gay-parent homes by using the overlapping terms "fatherless" and "motherless". It could be (and I think it is) trying to equate single parent families to homosexually-parented families, against all logic & certainly against the scientific spirit of any studies cited.
I see other things I have issues with, but I need sleep more than I need to type a response to a LJ post. =p
BTW, I have not seen you around in a while. ^_^
Reply
I've been hiding. :p
Reply
Reply
1) I never said I agreed with that site. I don't. :) I'm saying that many people do, and we need to come up with clear and solid reasons that -they- will accept in order to win.
...well, I almost did it in one. 4) actually, Clinton already redefined marriage: http://www.lectlaw.com/files/leg23.htm Funny how there was no controversy then, by comparison.
Essentially, the whole point behind my post was to say that you cannot win a debate without knowing the arsenal that your opponent has, or without even knowing what exactly they are saying. Too many people do not.
Reply
Reply
Reply
thats the best thing anyone has said yet!
about either topics
yea it sucks
get over it
theres nothing we can do
itll change eventually
its not like hes there forever
Reply
Leave a comment